Mayoral Selection Debated in Menlo Park
By Francesca Wodtke
MENLO PARK, Feb 2
When it comes to Menlo Park City Council, majority rules. And rules. And rules.
For several years, the Council majority, Mayor Nicholas Jellins,Council Member Lee Duboc, and Council Member Mickie Winkler , have held sway over the five-member governing body.
Critics claim the trio violated a 12-year-old policy last December when they selected one of their own for the year-long mayoral position, in an attempt to keep power within their clique.
The Mayor Selection Policy states that council members who have served on the Council for at least a year, but have not yet served as mayor should be first in line to become mayor. By the policy's definition, Council Members Cohen or Fergusson should have been elected. Neither was. Instead, Duboc and Winkler elected Jellins in a 3-2 vote.
But the position of mayor in Menlo Park brings with it no special benefits or veto power, all of which begs the question: Why would the trio want to keep the mayoral position within their group?
One reason may be to retain control over the setting of the Council's Agenda. Former mayor, Stephen Schmidt said in an interview, "The Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem meet with the City Manager in advance to discuss the agenda." In this way, "they [are] able to keep the agenda and the plans of the council majority private. By not allowing the other council members and the public to know what is going on they keep public debate and discussion to a minimum."
The issue of mayoral selection took center stage at last Tuesday's City Council meeting, when council members heatedly debated whether the City's Mayor Selection Policy should be made an enforceable rule, or whether it should remain a mere guideline.
Speaking for the minority, Council Member Cohen said he would like to see the existing protocol for mayoral selection at least be considered for passage as an ordinance.
However, Mayor Jellins, backed by Duboc and Winkler, argued that the policy should be viewed as no more than a guideline, and that the Council should be able to "appoint whomever they wish and operate the council as they wish whether it's dependent on tradition or not."
After about 20 minutes of discussion, Cohen's proposal to review the protocol was shot down 3-2 by Jellins, Duboc and Winkler.
In a follow-up phone call, Cohen observed that Jellins, Duboc and Winkler, whom Cohen refers to as a troika, think "anything goes." "They refuse to be bound by the policy insisting it's just a guideline. And so they ignore it," he said.
Schmidt, who publicly addressed the Council at the meeting, pointed out that the policy, which was originally drawn up in 1993, had only been broken once before. That was in 2002, when Duboc and Winkler elected Jellins instead of following protocol. The violation of the policy "was a preview of what was going to happen this year," said Schmidt. In 2002, the position should have gone to Chuck Kinney who was next in line by policy guidelines.
In a follow-up phone call, Winkler argued, "the Policy does not have to be followed because it does not carry any weight." The key thing is that the Council "should elect someone they are comfortable with," she noted. Moreover, she added that the idea the policy was only ever broken by their majority is "suspect."
Cohen disagreed, stating, "the only violation of protocol has been committed by this majority of three." Jack Morris, former mayor and unofficial historian of Menlo Park said in a phone call that Jellins, Duboc and Winkler wanted "one of their three to be mayor," adding "they are circulating the mayor position among them."
As for Mayor Jellins, he said in a phone call that the voting in of the mayor is an event of the past, and that the Council has more important issues to address. Winkler expressed similar sentiments.
Nevertheless, critics maintain that the rotation of the mayoral position within the trio is allowing the majority to keep public business under wraps. Morris said, "I believe that Fergusson and Cohen philosophically believe in open government. The other three would say that they're into open government, but when it suits their purposes they have no qualms about not being open."
Development projects such as the proposed golf course at Bayfront Park have come under fire for being orchestrated behind closed doors, in clear violation of California's Brown Act. Cohen, who is not pro-development, suggested that the pro-development trio may have not wanted the rest of the community to stand in the way of this project, and so they tried to keep it out of the public sphere.
Nevertheless, the Council dynamic changed when Fergusson was elected Mayor Pro Tem last December, at least according to Schmidt. "Now that Fergusson is part of the meetings with the City Manager, the government is more open," stated Schmidt, suggesting that Fergusson may be responsible for keeping the government operations more transparent.
Contact Francesca Wodtke at wodtke@stanford.edu
